0
Believer Posted 20 years ago
Grammar
Grammar help needed
1. Why does the first sentence have a singular verb and do the second and third sentences have plural verbs?
There is plenty of free parking.
There are still plenty of horses round here.
(I am sorry, this just came around/up, why not "around"? Is the word "round" properly placed here?)
There are plenty of other fish in the sea?
2. Why is there no article in front of the words "fully human"?
He (Jesus Christ) is fully human.
There is plenty of free parking.
There are still plenty of horses round here.
(I am sorry, this just came around/up, why not "around"? Is the word "round" properly placed here?)
There are plenty of other fish in the sea?
2. Why is there no article in front of the words "fully human"?
He (Jesus Christ) is fully human.
Top answer
round is BrE around is AmE
- round is BrE around is AmE
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
6 Answers
0
0
Hi Believer,
The "there is" vs. "there are" discussion has been had on here before, but briefly, "There is" is idiomatic in most cases. An exception is when a plural number nouns immediately follows - or a phrase that indicates plural, like "plenty of."
Parking isn't counted - If there are places to park, there is parking. (There can be limited parking, plenty of parking, paid pa
The "there is" vs. "there are" discussion has been had on here before, but briefly, "There is" is idiomatic in most cases. An exception is when a plural number nouns immediately follows - or a phrase that indicates plural, like "plenty of."
Parking isn't counted - If there are places to park, there is parking. (There can be limited parking, plenty of parking, paid pa
00
That's right. Parking is singular because it refers to an amount, not a number. If you were to say "parking spaces" you would use the plural because spaces are countable. Fish and horses can be counted, therefore, "plenty" indicates the plural. When referring to parking, you are talking about an amount, not a number.
00
Hi,
2. Why is there no article in front of the words "fully human"?
He (Jesus Christ) is fully human.
'Human' is used here as an adjective, not as a noun.
Best wishes, Clive
2. Why is there no article in front of the words "fully human"?
He (Jesus Christ) is fully human.
'Human' is used here as an adjective, not as a noun.
Best wishes, Clive
00
Thank you.
Then Is it safe to say that any noun which possesses the right quality to be used in such an adjectival form can be used without having any article attached to it?
He (just a human being) is angel.
Then Is it safe to say that any noun which possesses the right quality to be used in such an adjectival form can be used without having any article attached to it?
He (just a human being) is angel.
00
«Then Is it safe to say that any noun which possesses the right quality to be used in such an adjectival form can be used without having any article attached to it?»
I wouldn't say that. The word «human» can be both a noun or adjective, while the word «anglel» is only a noun, as I know.
However, there is an adjective «angellic».
«He is fully human» means literally that
I wouldn't say that. The word «human» can be both a noun or adjective, while the word «anglel» is only a noun, as I know.
However, there is an adjective «angellic».
«He is fully human» means literally that
0
Related Questions